"TELL HER NO,NO NO"
Having many conversations the past month with ultra conservatives, along will ultra liberals, teapartyers, Obama lovers and even pedestrians, one thing I find they all seem to have in common. [really refreshing]
No one mentioned voting "YES" on any levy, they may had a multitude of different reasons but I could not find even one person who would support the Lake Board of Developmental Disabilities levy. This levy is not a new levy, just a "replacement levy" the simple fact is if your house is worth $100,000 you currently pay $58.00 a year. Now if the levy passes that same homeowner will be paying $104.00 quite an increase I believe this will total up to an additional 8 million dollars to the agency a year.
I truly care about the people this agency supports, but I must add "what planet are these board members living on."
The economy is just barely starting to rebound, and no one has a Chrystal ball to forecast the next year.
The best way I can explain this is the head administrator makes over $135,000 would this person be willing to take a $65,000 cut in pay? Ridiculous you say?
No more than with this levy property owners will be expected to increase their tax bill.
Governments at all levels were supposed to work for the people, remember when they were called public servants? Somewhere along the line it has now changed the people are now expected to work for the government. 83% of there budget goes to wages and benefits.
I could have chosen any money issue or levy but this one has it all.
A clientele that is at the public mercy, along with an unbelievable request to all of us in this economy.
Please feel free to comment on any Issue or levy.
Anybody got an idea or solution?
posted by terminator1 @ 6:03 PM
29 Comments
29 Comments:
MR/DD spends over $3,093,420.00 on 56 salaried employees alone.
This figure doesn't include all the staff needed. I noticed in the newspaperr article that no where was it mentioned the total number of clients they have. I will be voting NO on this.
I will never vote yes ever again. These people just blow money!
Let me thik about this. We pay
a levy for the schools
a levy for the library
a levy for MR/DD
a levy for ADAMHS Board
a levy for senior citizens
a levy for the crime lab
a levy for children (Jobs & Family)
Ummmm - I've been kind - a quick check with the county auditor's web site shows we pay a couple other county-wide levies too. I'll vote NO on every levy so maybe I could afford to vote YES to a police/fire levy for my town, Painesville! Not that a police/fire levy for Painesville is in the making - I'm just saying.
One of the big problems I have with this levy is that the agency is promoting it as a 'renewal'....but when you crunch the numbers it increases the tax bill to homeowners. After it was explained to me how the money works they aren't really saying anything wrong....but the average person thinks a 'renewal' is just that...nothing changes....certainly not the bottom line amount paid. I think it is misleading to say the least. And I really don't like fellow citizens using heavy-handed tactics like threatening cuts to a needy portion of the population in order to protect their own jobs/hefty salaries. Take a salary cut first before you stick your hand out again.
Funny how they forgot the 1.5 mil levy passed in 1998? Thats raises another 7 million dollars.
Along with friends spending over $160,000 just to help get this levy passed. Wonder who these friends are?
Kathy I love you but Painesville City blows money with the best of them.
Let me show you 16 acres of swamp along the Grand River, Painesville City paid $250,000 that I bet they couldn't sell for $5000.00 .
That plus small dump trucks costing $85,000 that for the life of me can't find one on the market for over $56,000? [probably a financial move to move money into different funds] lets see what the truck costs?
Waste in government at all levels is rappant.
Fire Station on Jackson St. wonder who owns the property the city will buy for this project?
I hope you are not saying that a fire station is being considered on the old Jackson St. park property. The "sale" of that property has long been a pain point for me.
Does anyone have any background on the transaction that took place when the current owner purchased the property? Why would the city sell that land? What was in it for Painesville?
Not saying, but your on the right track. Check who owns all available property around the 44 exchange.
Here's my thought... The current owners purchased that property from the city knowing that in the future the city would need to buy it back to improve and expand the Jackson/44 interchange. The city should have NEVER given that land up, it was very poor planning.
Osborne owns most everything on the west side under various names.
I don't like the idea of over-paying for anything, but I would rather buy the land from Osborne than a current member of the city council.
Do you suspect this would require a levy of some sort to raise the funds?
The Legal Advertisement for the MRDD Levy is a replacement of the old levy. They say it is not a new levy: well, yes it is because the hit to everyone's bottom line will be an almost double increase from what you paid before and is NEW to all.
In addition, this Levy has no time frame (3,5,7 years for a re-vote). This levy will go on Forever without any vote from the people.
Go back to the drawing board and really look at your numbers. Increased clients/same number of personnel/yet they say their costs have increased. Write your increased costs down and let all of us see them in order to make a sound judgement as to whether we should vote Y or N.
Will not be voting Y on this because the info given out is only on; "Oh, we can't let all these people down by cutting services to them." This goes hand-in-hand with all politicians who use; "This is for the Children" sympathy act to get people to lean their way.
charterlady
The only thing that concerns me is there any collusion involved? Who decided, or what study was conducted by an independent source that this would be the best next location for fire station No,2? Remember response times must be decided by council according to the fire chief? The residents south of the NS railroad are the most vunerable. [not to mention three school just on the other side of the tracks?]
It will be interesting how this administration wraps this up looking for money from a levy?
How much advance notice did the city manager and/or council need before they realized the hospital was moving?
TERM, I know you have been busy this past week, just wondering if you have had a chance to view the council meeting yet?
I have not watched the full meeting yet. Although the questions councilman Flock asked should have been able to be answered on the spot. One question about the administrative search warrant could a Muncipal Judge order one?
Just a thought here...but after looking at an aerial map of the whole Rt 44 area....no matter who owns the land (anyone know who/what Heisley/Hopkins is?) that is a pretty busy intersection. I can only imagine what kinds of traffic problems there might be during rush hour....And wouldn't they STILL have to get over RR tracks no matter which way they go? I suggest what we really need is a new station south of the tracks (maybe jointly with Concord, since we seem to like to do things with that community)and a firm deal with surrounding communities to work together to take care of the north end. Why is this so difficult? And why is this just now being addressed. We had plenty of notice that the hospital was leaving and there were lots of studies done prior to that. Be that as it may, we are now aware of the facts and should deal with them ASAP. And I sure hope that the powers-that-be are very careful to avoid any appearance of cronyism ....lots of property owned by the same one or two entities...and I don't think it was purchased because of the picturesque neighborhood.
Painesville Township has had meeting with local communities about a fire station on Blackbrook Rd.? Isn't it about time everyone starts working together for the good of everyone? A note to all Painesville residents from a former city resident. As long as Rita McMahon and Joe Hada are calling the shots don't expect a solution to this in the near future. Take it from a displaced Millstone resident talk is cheap.
Heisley Hopkins Inc is a Rick Osborne Jr. company.
I'm telling her no! along with him no! Who ever asks will be told "NO"
I think its funny that you even wonder if there's collusion? Everything done in Painesville is to increase someones wealth. You just have to prove it.
So Term, riddle me this: Was the deal between the city and the hospital system regarding the purchase of Lake East an example of collusion?
Not in any illegal sense, but have you ever seen a deal like this? The hospital or the county could not apply for the demolition grant, so Painesville was brought in to apply for it. Two important conclusions 1. The hospital or the county did not want to get stuck with the cost of bringing the hospital down. 2. The hospital system wants the building destroyed as to do other hospital system could use that facility.
The hospital system paid over $600,000 of Painesville's share along with deeding the property to the city. Was this a sensible business decision?
Now Painesville ownes the property and brought in only one developer. for a project of this size? When asked for minutes along with conversations with other developers councilman Flock was told there were none?
Along with no R.F.P. {request for proposal} which seems to be normal for any job of this scope.
Kathy, maybe not collusion but certainly manipulation.
The termination of the hospital was that for the greater good of the community? You decide.
No, I don't see how NOT having a medical center the likes of what we HAD could be good for the community. Aren't the three commissioners also the "board" of the hospital corporation? Something like that - by law they (seated commissioners) are also Lake Hospital System Corporation directors. I don't mean the board of Lake Hospital Systems (oops, they have a new name) I mean of the Corporation. I don't know - maybe that changed with the new name.
Did the city ever give a reason to purchase that land along the river for $250,000? You seem to be stuck on that purchase, is there a reason? You have brought it up many times.
I'm still confused why this purchase was ever made, spending a quarter of a million dollars for land in a wetland that is mostly underwater seemed like a poor investment to me. What ever possessed the City Manager to recommend this purchase to council has baffled me for almost five years. When questioned by a reporter the city manager claimed the county "would redirect the money." I checked with all county officials at the time and they all told me the county had zero control over that money.
This was at the time the city was going for a 3.9mill charter change for safety,and I see this kind of purchase as a "waste". The city manager and I have spared over this and I never felt it was resolved. Maybe you should call your councilman or the administration and you will get a better answer than I have been given.
This 16 acres sits on the southeast bank of the Grand River at the Richmond St. bridge going into Fairport Harbor. Theres the property the condos are on ,another strip of property and then the land the citizens own along and in the river.
This is recent history that should not be forgotten.
With the purchase and answers you were given do you believe that collusion was used in this purchase? I have always felt that Osborne and Hach got very special treatment on the purchase of Jackson Park.
I can't prove collusion but find me one person in this town that will explain [using a real name] that that was $250,000 well spent?Follow the money.
As far as Jackson Park I believe Paul Hach got "special" treatment on changing the landscape of that property. Along with Osborne purchase of the land and putting a gas well on the property.
When and who decided to sell that property? With a new exchange being planned north of the property, wouldn't the city have done better waiting?
I do not begrudge any private individual making his/her fair share of money the old-fashioned American way...working hard and taking some risks. I do have a problem with private groups/people passing the risks off on the public domain and still reaping the profits (are you listening Ryan Homes?) Letting the City of Painesville be on the hook for allowing flooding basements to be built is shrewd...So my question here is why is the city playing ball with this? The buck will stop at the city's door when a basement collapses or someone gets sick from mold and all the developer has to do is point in local government's direction and say they were told it was OK to build. The short-sighted chase for profit (the developer) and more property tax and utility income (the City) is not in the best interests of the greater good. These homes do not have to be built on a marsh...the developer has the choice to build elsewhere. We're not talking about an essential service, there is no urgent or exigent reason for these homes to be built. The city certainly can say no...or better yet...let the developer take them to court. (that'll have the added benefit of keeping local counsel busy...unless the CM farms it out to her buddies in Cleveland) This way at the very least the balance of the project is delayed and worst case, if/when Mother Nature takes back her marsh, the city can point to the court case to say it was against it all along. It is irresponsible of our local government to go along with this just for the nebulous gain of a few dollars in city coffers.
Alice, long after Mortell Ass. and Ryan Homes are gone. The City of Painesville will still be here and geuss who will have to make these people "whole" becaused of condemed homes caused by collapsed basements? Lake, swamp, marsh, wetlands. you just don't build homes let alone with basements. The developers are looking for the city to give them cover. Will they give it?
The short-term almighty dollar is a strong incentive....and making money in and of itself is not wrong....but to do it at the expense of individuals who are making the biggest investment in most of their lives is just plain wrong.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home